The Tea Party is back in business! (1 Viewer)

[Slapdash]

This is costing us 300 million dollars a day:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/shutdown-would-cost-u-s-economy-300-million-a-day-ihs-says.html

So due to people getting furloughed they can't spend money, yet there is talk that these furloughed people will still get paid at a later date which means their spending will be delayed, is this what you keep posting about? Oh that and our programs are inefficient and there's a hidden cost to stopping and restarting programs?

Can't tell if you're joking.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

the story about the navy Air Force game being cancelled for the "optics"

Political stunt, shocking. Who's behind it?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

This is costing us 300 million dollars a day:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/shutdown-would-cost-u-s-economy-300-million-a-day-ihs-says.html

So due to people getting furloughed they can't spend money, yet there is talk that these furloughed people will still get paid at a later date which means their spending will be delayed, is this what you keep posting about? Oh that and our programs are inefficient and there's a hidden cost to stopping and restarting programs?

Can't tell if you're joking.

Not joking, what costs millions of dollars to stop and start and why does it cost so much? I assumed the bulk of the millions is due to money not in government employees pockets to use on spending.

 

[Statorama]

Shutdown day 2, everything still seems fine. No foreseeable problems on day three either. Biggest concern the politicians should have is the realization that we really don't need them for much, and that the tea party mantra of a smaller, leaner, more efficient government actually makes sense

 

[Scoresman]

This is costing us 300 million dollars a day:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/shutdown-would-cost-u-s-economy-300-million-a-day-ihs-says.html

So due to people getting furloughed they can't spend money, yet there is talk that these furloughed people will still get paid at a later date which means their spending will be delayed, is this what you keep posting about? Oh that and our programs are inefficient and there's a hidden cost to stopping and restarting programs?

Can't tell if you're joking.

Not joking, what costs millions of dollars to stop and start and why does it cost so much? I assumed the bulk of the millions is due to money not in government employees pockets to use on spending.

One example I read that could cost a lot is a scheduled NASA launch for sometime this month. If it misses the launch window due to the shutdown the next launch window could be delayed 2 years. I'm sure there are costs associated with that kind of schedule delay.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

The Tea Party followers blindly following the Fox News mantra of "Yeah, this really isn't affecting anyone" is the ultimate in d-baggery.

 

[Joe T]

This whole thing is just one big Boner.

That's what Tim said!

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

This is costing us 300 million dollars a day:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/shutdown-would-cost-u-s-economy-300-million-a-day-ihs-says.html

So due to people getting furloughed they can't spend money, yet there is talk that these furloughed people will still get paid at a later date which means their spending will be delayed, is this what you keep posting about? Oh that and our programs are inefficient and there's a hidden cost to stopping and restarting programs?

Can't tell if you're joking.

Not joking, what costs millions of dollars to stop and start and why does it cost so much? I assumed the bulk of the millions is due to money not in government employees pockets to use on spending.

One example I read that could cost a lot is a scheduled NASA launch for sometime this month. If it misses the launch window due to the shutdown the next launch window could be delayed 2 years. I'm sure there are costs associated with that kind of schedule delay.

Ok I can understand that, but how is that costing us millions of dollars today? It's not like NASA is generating revenue and by them not operating we are not getting that revenue (i.e. losing millions of dollars per day). Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of NASA but modifying their launch date which could potentially cost more money down the road is not losing millions today, if anything NASA will have to take the hit in their budget and some other cool space exploration may have to get pushed back to a later date.

 

[timschochet]

Shutdown day 2, everything still seems fine. No foreseeable problems on day three either. Biggest concern the politicians should have is the realization that we really don't need them for much, and that the tea party mantra of a smaller, leaner, more efficient government actually makes sense

Do you know what the NIH is?

 

[Joe T]

This is costing us 300 million dollars a day:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/shutdown-would-cost-u-s-economy-300-million-a-day-ihs-says.html

So due to people getting furloughed they can't spend money, yet there is talk that these furloughed people will still get paid at a later date which means their spending will be delayed, is this what you keep posting about? Oh that and our programs are inefficient and there's a hidden cost to stopping and restarting programs?

Can't tell if you're joking.

Not joking, what costs millions of dollars to stop and start and why does it cost so much? I assumed the bulk of the millions is due to money not in government employees pockets to use on spending.

The cost is an estimated "lost economic output" by people not working. In other words, it is an estimate grabbed out of thin air. X number of people didn't work today, *poof* we just lost $300m in productivity.

 

[timschochet]

I recognized that sometimes companies can't afford to keep everyone employed... gubmint should take notes from the private sector's trimming of fat over the last couple years. People will pick themselves up and move on, just like I did.

Damn you are cold

How so, exactly?

Because you want to shut down the Government for a month or more, and it looks like you don't give a crap how it effects anybody

I want #### fixed. If that means the government is shut down for a month or more that sucks but we can't keep kicking the can down the road. Its extremely unfortunate that it may result in people losing their jobs. I feel that. However you shouldn't expect to be immune to layoffs/paycuts/downsizing just because you don't work in the private sector.

Have you bothered to learn what this shutdown is about? I'm just curious because you keep bringing up stuff that has nothing to do with it.

 

[GibbyGarcia]

This is costing us 300 million dollars a day:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/shutdown-would-cost-u-s-economy-300-million-a-day-ihs-says.html

So due to people getting furloughed they can't spend money, yet there is talk that these furloughed people will still get paid at a later date which means their spending will be delayed, is this what you keep posting about? Oh that and our programs are inefficient and there's a hidden cost to stopping and restarting programs?

Can't tell if you're joking.

Not joking, what costs millions of dollars to stop and start and why does it cost so much? I assumed the bulk of the millions is due to money not in government employees pockets to use on spending.

One example I read that could cost a lot is a scheduled NASA launch for sometime this month. If it misses the launch window due to the shutdown the next launch window could be delayed 2 years. I'm sure there are costs associated with that kind of schedule delay.

Ok I can understand that, but how is that costing us millions of dollars today? It's not like NASA is generating revenue and by them not operating we are not getting that revenue (i.e. losing millions of dollars per day). Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of NASA but modifying their launch date which could potentially cost more money down the road is not losing millions today, if anything NASA will have to take the hit in their budget and some other cool space exploration may have to get pushed back to a later date.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2013/0930/Federal-shutdown-won-t-save-taxpayers-money.-It-will-cost-them.-video

This is a basic explanation without any partisan spin.

 

[timschochet]

On the topic of how these idiots get voted into their seats, this is a reminder of what Republican primary voters are like:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/161910086/PPP-Louisiana-poll-August-2013

Q2

Who do you think was more responsible for thepoor response to Hurricane Katrina: George W.Bush or Barack Obama?

George W. Bush.............................................28%

Barack Obama...............................................29%

Not sure...................................................44%

Over 50% of all Republican voters continue to believe that Obama was born outside of the USA. Think about that for a moment- over 50%!!

Where's your evidence of this?

Tell you, why don't you Google it? You're a proven racist and you don't deserve cordial discussion. I have no idea why you were allowed back in this forum in order to spew your hateful ignorance.

 

[TheIronSheik]

Shutdown day 2, everything still seems fine. No foreseeable problems on day three either. Biggest concern the politicians should have is the realization that we really don't need them for much, and that the tea party mantra of a smaller, leaner, more efficient government actually makes sense

Do you know what the NIH is?

I know what NIHM is. But that's kind of a secret.

 

[quickhands]

I recognized that sometimes companies can't afford to keep everyone employed... gubmint should take notes from the private sector's trimming of fat over the last couple years. People will pick themselves up and move on, just like I did.

Damn you are cold

How so, exactly?

Because you want to shut down the Government for a month or more, and it looks like you don't give a crap how it effects anybody

I want #### fixed. If that means the government is shut down for a month or more that sucks but we can't keep kicking the can down the road. Its extremely unfortunate that it may result in people losing their jobs. I feel that. However you shouldn't expect to be immune to layoffs/paycuts/downsizing just because you don't work in the private sector.

Have you bothered to learn what this shutdown is about? I'm just curious because you keep bringing up stuff that has nothing to do with it.

I heard its about the palestinians

 

[[icon]]

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Dems are six up with three to play -- what else can Republicans do but hope to obtain a forfeit by talking about everything except what's actually happening? You see it in this thread.

 

[shader]

Markets taking a beating today. I think the risk of the debt ceiling is starting to make an impact.

 

[B-Deep]

Shutdown day 2, everything still seems fine. No foreseeable problems on day three either. Biggest concern the politicians should have is the realization that we really don't need them for much, and that the tea party mantra of a smaller, leaner, more efficient government actually makes sense

Do you know what the NIH is?

I know what NIHM is. But that's kind of a secret.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Dems are six up with three to play -- what else can Republicans do but hope to obtain a forfeit by talking about everything except what's actually happening? You see it in this thread.

It is all about ball control, just don't turn the ball over and they can run out the clock.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

This is costing us 300 million dollars a day:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/shutdown-would-cost-u-s-economy-300-million-a-day-ihs-says.html

So due to people getting furloughed they can't spend money, yet there is talk that these furloughed people will still get paid at a later date which means their spending will be delayed, is this what you keep posting about? Oh that and our programs are inefficient and there's a hidden cost to stopping and restarting programs?

Can't tell if you're joking.

Not joking, what costs millions of dollars to stop and start and why does it cost so much? I assumed the bulk of the millions is due to money not in government employees pockets to use on spending.

One example I read that could cost a lot is a scheduled NASA launch for sometime this month. If it misses the launch window due to the shutdown the next launch window could be delayed 2 years. I'm sure there are costs associated with that kind of schedule delay.

Ok I can understand that, but how is that costing us millions of dollars today? It's not like NASA is generating revenue and by them not operating we are not getting that revenue (i.e. losing millions of dollars per day). Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of NASA but modifying their launch date which could potentially cost more money down the road is not losing millions today, if anything NASA will have to take the hit in their budget and some other cool space exploration may have to get pushed back to a later date.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2013/0930/Federal-shutdown-won-t-save-taxpayers-money.-It-will-cost-them.-videoThis is a basic explanation without any partisan spin.

Thanks.

The $300MM number was pulled out of somebody's ### and Tim copied and pasted it.

 

[timschochet]

Shutdown day 2, everything still seems fine. No foreseeable problems on day three either. Biggest concern the politicians should have is the realization that we really don't need them for much, and that the tea party mantra of a smaller, leaner, more efficient government actually makes sense

Do you know what the NIH is?

I know what NIHM is. But that's kind of a secret.

That made me chuckle, I admit. But seriously, shutting down the NIH is no joke. It's playing around with people's lives and good health, and it's incredibly irresponsible.

 

[timschochet]

This is costing us 300 million dollars a day:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/shutdown-would-cost-u-s-economy-300-million-a-day-ihs-says.html

So due to people getting furloughed they can't spend money, yet there is talk that these furloughed people will still get paid at a later date which means their spending will be delayed, is this what you keep posting about? Oh that and our programs are inefficient and there's a hidden cost to stopping and restarting programs?

Can't tell if you're joking.

Not joking, what costs millions of dollars to stop and start and why does it cost so much? I assumed the bulk of the millions is due to money not in government employees pockets to use on spending.

One example I read that could cost a lot is a scheduled NASA launch for sometime this month. If it misses the launch window due to the shutdown the next launch window could be delayed 2 years. I'm sure there are costs associated with that kind of schedule delay.

Ok I can understand that, but how is that costing us millions of dollars today? It's not like NASA is generating revenue and by them not operating we are not getting that revenue (i.e. losing millions of dollars per day). Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of NASA but modifying their launch date which could potentially cost more money down the road is not losing millions today, if anything NASA will have to take the hit in their budget and some other cool space exploration may have to get pushed back to a later date.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2013/0930/Federal-shutdown-won-t-save-taxpayers-money.-It-will-cost-them.-videoThis is a basic explanation without any partisan spin.

Thanks.The $300MM number was pulled out of somebody's ### and Tim copied and pasted it.

Somebody's ### is also called Bloomberg- it's a fairly conservative, highly respected financial website.

 

[CGRdrJoe]

Shutdown day 2, everything still seems fine. No foreseeable problems on day three either. Biggest concern the politicians should have is the realization that we really don't need them for much, and that the tea party mantra of a smaller, leaner, more efficient government actually makes sense

fine for who? not fine for those that are furloughed and not getting paid. not fine for those of us that are working longer hours to make up for the missing civilians in our workforce.

 

[timschochet]

Shutdown day 2, everything still seems fine. No foreseeable problems on day three either. Biggest concern the politicians should have is the realization that we really don't need them for much, and that the tea party mantra of a smaller, leaner, more efficient government actually makes sense

fine for who? not fine for those that are furloughed and not getting paid. not fine for those of us that are working longer hours to make up for the missing civilians in our workforce.

Stat doesn't think you're needed.

 

[Henry Ford]

So... anyone know what FEMA looks like these days? What with the soon-to-be hurricane set to make landfall in Alabama this weekend?

 

[GibbyGarcia]

This is costing us 300 million dollars a day:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/shutdown-would-cost-u-s-economy-300-million-a-day-ihs-says.html

So due to people getting furloughed they can't spend money, yet there is talk that these furloughed people will still get paid at a later date which means their spending will be delayed, is this what you keep posting about? Oh that and our programs are inefficient and there's a hidden cost to stopping and restarting programs?

Can't tell if you're joking.

Not joking, what costs millions of dollars to stop and start and why does it cost so much? I assumed the bulk of the millions is due to money not in government employees pockets to use on spending.

One example I read that could cost a lot is a scheduled NASA launch for sometime this month. If it misses the launch window due to the shutdown the next launch window could be delayed 2 years. I'm sure there are costs associated with that kind of schedule delay.

Ok I can understand that, but how is that costing us millions of dollars today? It's not like NASA is generating revenue and by them not operating we are not getting that revenue (i.e. losing millions of dollars per day). Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of NASA but modifying their launch date which could potentially cost more money down the road is not losing millions today, if anything NASA will have to take the hit in their budget and some other cool space exploration may have to get pushed back to a later date.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2013/0930/Federal-shutdown-won-t-save-taxpayers-money.-It-will-cost-them.-videoThis is a basic explanation without any partisan spin.

Thanks.The $300MM number was pulled out of somebody's ### and Tim copied and pasted it.

Somebody's ### is also called Bloomberg- it's a fairly conservative, highly respected financial website.

The $300 Million number comes from the averaging of cost of the past 2 shutdowns in GDP. CSM downplays the federal employee pay impact because they assume that there will be a furlough pay resolution and that money into the economy isn't lost because its early in the fiscal quarter. This thing drags near halloween and $300mm will be low.

 

[timschochet]

The comments that guys like Icon and Stat are making here are being parroted mindlessly by conservative talk show hosts and prominent conservative spokesmen all over the country. I suppose it was predictable, but it's not helping the Republican brand. Conservatives are their own worst enemies.

 

[timschochet]

This is costing us 300 million dollars a day:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/shutdown-would-cost-u-s-economy-300-million-a-day-ihs-says.html

So due to people getting furloughed they can't spend money, yet there is talk that these furloughed people will still get paid at a later date which means their spending will be delayed, is this what you keep posting about? Oh that and our programs are inefficient and there's a hidden cost to stopping and restarting programs?

Can't tell if you're joking.

Not joking, what costs millions of dollars to stop and start and why does it cost so much? I assumed the bulk of the millions is due to money not in government employees pockets to use on spending.

One example I read that could cost a lot is a scheduled NASA launch for sometime this month. If it misses the launch window due to the shutdown the next launch window could be delayed 2 years. I'm sure there are costs associated with that kind of schedule delay.

Ok I can understand that, but how is that costing us millions of dollars today? It's not like NASA is generating revenue and by them not operating we are not getting that revenue (i.e. losing millions of dollars per day). Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of NASA but modifying their launch date which could potentially cost more money down the road is not losing millions today, if anything NASA will have to take the hit in their budget and some other cool space exploration may have to get pushed back to a later date.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2013/0930/Federal-shutdown-won-t-save-taxpayers-money.-It-will-cost-them.-videoThis is a basic explanation without any partisan spin.

Thanks.The $300MM number was pulled out of somebody's ### and Tim copied and pasted it.

Somebody's ### is also called Bloomberg- it's a fairly conservative, highly respected financial website.

The $300 Million number comes from the averaging of cost of the past 2 shutdowns in GDP. CSM downplays the federal employee pay impact because they assume that there will be a furlough pay resolution and that money into the economy isn't lost because its early in the fiscal quarter. This thing drags near halloween and $300mm will be low.

Even if there is a pay resolution, we will have been paying people for work that wasn't done while they were on furlough.

 

[GibbyGarcia]

So... anyone know what FEMA looks like these days? What with the soon-to-be hurricane set to make landfall in Alabama this weekend?

"FEMA remains committed to supporting disaster survivors. Our ongoing response operations, such as the individual assistance being provided to survivors of the flooding in Colorado, will not be impacted directly by a government shutdown. FEMA's response to disasters and emergencies is funded by the Disaster Relief Fund (DRF), which would not initially be affected by a funding lapse for annual appropriations."

The DRF is a standing fund that continues on from one fiscal year to the next, so a lapse in annual funding doesn't have an immediate impact.

Quote from FEMA spokesperson

 

[quickhands]

The comments that guys like Icon and Stat are making here are being parroted mindlessly by conservative talk show hosts and prominent conservative spokesmen all over the country. I suppose it was predictable, but it's not helping the Republican brand. Conservatives are their own worst enemies.

just like the palestinians?

 

[Lutherman2112]

This is costing us 300 million dollars a day:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/shutdown-would-cost-u-s-economy-300-million-a-day-ihs-says.html

So due to people getting furloughed they can't spend money, yet there is talk that these furloughed people will still get paid at a later date which means their spending will be delayed, is this what you keep posting about? Oh that and our programs are inefficient and there's a hidden cost to stopping and restarting programs?

Can't tell if you're joking.

Not joking, what costs millions of dollars to stop and start and why does it cost so much? I assumed the bulk of the millions is due to money not in government employees pockets to use on spending.

From the gentleman that said "optics":

Among those relieved was Navy athletic director Chet Gladchuk, who said scratching the game in Annapolis could have cost the Naval Academy Athletic Association more than $4 million in revenue.

“This weekend’s activities have been a year in the making. Travel plans have been made, hotels have been booked, tickets have been sold, reunions had been organized,” Gladchuk said. “One could almost hear the collective sigh of relief that reverberated throughout the area when word came down that the game would go on.”

 

[TheIronSheik]

So... anyone know what FEMA looks like these days? What with the soon-to-be hurricane set to make landfall in Alabama this weekend?

"FEMA remains committed to supporting disaster survivors. Our ongoing response operations, such as the individual assistance being provided to survivors of the flooding in Colorado, will not be impacted directly by a government shutdown. FEMA's response to disasters and emergencies is funded by the Disaster Relief Fund (DRF), which would not initially be affected by a funding lapse for annual appropriations."

The DRF is a standing fund that continues on from one fiscal year to the next, so a lapse in annual funding doesn't have an immediate impact.

Quote from FEMA spokesperson

Oh, good. I thought it would be a mess like Katrina or Sandy.

 

[timschochet]

The comments that guys like Icon and Stat are making here are being parroted mindlessly by conservative talk show hosts and prominent conservative spokesmen all over the country. I suppose it was predictable, but it's not helping the Republican brand. Conservatives are their own worst enemies.

just like the palestinians?

It really wouldn't surprise me to learn that the same people are handling the PR for both groups.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

So... anyone know what FEMA looks like these days? What with the soon-to-be hurricane set to make landfall in Alabama this weekend?

"FEMA remains committed to supporting disaster survivors. Our ongoing response operations, such as the individual assistance being provided to survivors of the flooding in Colorado, will not be impacted directly by a government shutdown. FEMA's response to disasters and emergencies is funded by the Disaster Relief Fund (DRF), which would not initially be affected by a funding lapse for annual appropriations."

The DRF is a standing fund that continues on from one fiscal year to the next, so a lapse in annual funding doesn't have an immediate impact.

Quote from FEMA spokesperson

Oh, good. I thought it would be a mess like Katrina or Sandy.

Forecasters are saying it is not going to be that strong.

 

[Todd Andrews]

So does this boil down to the KooKs hate the Republican individual man-date?

 

[Joe McGee]

Ron Paul makes a good point, why is this being forced on the American public? It is pretty B.S., why can't we opt out of it?

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?play=1&video=3000203730

Do you really need to ask this question? Because no would choose this turd otherwise. Why do you think Congress and the unions got waivers so they don't have to have their premiums skyrocket? If Congress can't afford Obamacare, the American people sure as hell can't.

Good God, you are dumb.

Actually 2500 waivers have been issued. Thanks for showing everyone what a fool you are.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

This is costing us 300 million dollars a day:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/shutdown-would-cost-u-s-economy-300-million-a-day-ihs-says.html

So due to people getting furloughed they can't spend money, yet there is talk that these furloughed people will still get paid at a later date which means their spending will be delayed, is this what you keep posting about? Oh that and our programs are inefficient and there's a hidden cost to stopping and restarting programs?

Can't tell if you're joking.

Not joking, what costs millions of dollars to stop and start and why does it cost so much? I assumed the bulk of the millions is due to money not in government employees pockets to use on spending.

One example I read that could cost a lot is a scheduled NASA launch for sometime this month. If it misses the launch window due to the shutdown the next launch window could be delayed 2 years. I'm sure there are costs associated with that kind of schedule delay.

Ok I can understand that, but how is that costing us millions of dollars today? It's not like NASA is generating revenue and by them not operating we are not getting that revenue (i.e. losing millions of dollars per day). Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of NASA but modifying their launch date which could potentially cost more money down the road is not losing millions today, if anything NASA will have to take the hit in their budget and some other cool space exploration may have to get pushed back to a later date.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2013/0930/Federal-shutdown-won-t-save-taxpayers-money.-It-will-cost-them.-videoThis is a basic explanation without any partisan spin.

Thanks.The $300MM number was pulled out of somebody's ### and Tim copied and pasted it.

Somebody's ### is also called Bloomberg- it's a fairly conservative, highly respected financial website.

The $300 Million number comes from the averaging of cost of the past 2 shutdowns in GDP. CSM downplays the federal employee pay impact because they assume that there will be a furlough pay resolution and that money into the economy isn't lost because its early in the fiscal quarter. This thing drags near halloween and $300mm will be low.

$300 million per day he said, not total. Also just because some family cannot go see the Washington Monument doesn't mean they immediately put that money into their savings account, it will get spent regardless. This is what a large portion of this "lost money" is coming from, from business that cannot profit off of tourists, boohoo.

 

[Lutherman2112]

Ron Paul makes a good point, why is this being forced on the American public? It is pretty B.S., why can't we opt out of it?

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?play=1&video=3000203730

Do you really need to ask this question? Because no would choose this turd otherwise. Why do you think Congress and the unions got waivers so they don't have to have their premiums skyrocket? If Congress can't afford Obamacare, the American people sure as hell can't.

Good God, you are dumb.

Actually 2500 waivers have been issued. Thanks for showing everyone what a fool you are.

 

[Jim11]

On the topic of how these idiots get voted into their seats, this is a reminder of what Republican primary voters are like:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/161910086/PPP-Louisiana-poll-August-2013

Q2

Who do you think was more responsible for thepoor response to Hurricane Katrina: George W.Bush or Barack Obama?

George W. Bush.............................................28%

Barack Obama...............................................29%

Not sure...................................................44%

Over 50% of all Republican voters continue to believe that Obama was born outside of the USA. Think about that for a moment- over 50%!!

Where's your evidence of this?

Tell you, why don't you Google it?You're a proven racist and you don't deserve cordial discussion. I have no idea why you were allowed back in this forum in order to spew your hateful ignorance.

IOW, you're full of #####...on that as well as most other things. If anyone is hateful, it's you, making up BS, like the racist remark. Tell that to my bridge partner, who is black...I'll tell him about you tonight; should give him a laugh.

 

[Slapdash]

The $300 Million number comes from the averaging of cost of the past 2 shutdowns in GDP. CSM downplays the federal employee pay impact because they assume that there will be a furlough pay resolution and that money into the economy isn't lost because its early in the fiscal quarter. This thing drags near halloween and $300mm will be low.

$300 million per day he said, not total. Also just because some family cannot go see the Washington Monument doesn't mean they immediately put that money into their savings account, it will get spent regardless. This is what a large portion of this "lost money" is coming from, from business that cannot profit off of tourists, boohoo.

I think studying previous episodes is much more useful than just making #### up.

 

[Koya]

I am hardly a Congressional Historian, and I am sure there have been awful examples of "leadership" in the past, however has there ever been a worse Speaker than Boehner? He seems to be doing harm to the nation, to Congress' reputation (as if it could get worse... but WAIT! THERE'S MORE!) and to his own party. He seems to have lost the faith of many in his own party and has demonstrated not only an inability to get anything done. Well, anything positive.

Historically, will be be viewed as one of the worst speakers ever?

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Has anyone given any thought to the possibility that the republicans want this shutdown to ruin the economy, and force it into another depression?

It would be a great talking point for them, "Obama was president when the depression happened!".

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

The last shutdowns were estimated to cost $2.1bn plus some unknown amount for its effect on the economy. And that's when things were good, not when the economy was stagnating.

Ultimately, the shutdown is more symbolic than it is catastrophic. But whether it costs $1bn or $6bn, the real burr is that it didn't have to happen. It's one extremist faction of one party throwing a temper tantrum because the rest of the country doesn't agree with them on an issue. And for that, they're going to piss in everybody's corn flakes.

It's still a bogus number any way you slice.I think most of the #####ing in here is people working for the government thinking they are entitled to some kind of guaranteed job security. Welcome to the real world. Don't like it? Get a new job like everyone else does when they get laid off.

 

[Slapdash]

Has anyone given any thought to the possibility that the republicans want this shutdown to ruin the economy, and force it into another depression?

It would be a great talking point for them, "Obama was president when the depression happened!".

How would that be any different than the past 5 years?

 

[The Commish]

I don't doubt this, but I also don't doubt that the dip#### factor is much higher on the conservative side of the spectrum.

Kinda hard to justify this when you have Pelosi and Reid on the "liberal side". Reality is, the only real difference at this point is the GOP is opening their mouths and removing all doubt while the Dems let them.

 

[Doug B]

So... anyone know what FEMA looks like these days? What with the soon-to-be hurricane set to make landfall in Alabama this weekend?

Disaster relief is totally unaffected by the currently shutdown. It's not appropriated when the main budget is approved. Disaster-relief funding is periodically "topped off", and there was a good chunk approved earlier this year.

Don't have specific FEMA numbers, but for FEMA's parent agency (Dept of Homeland Security) overall, 7 out of 8 employees keep working through gov't shutdowns.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Obamacare was passed by both houses, signed by the president and confirmed as constitutional. Then we had an election where Obamacare was one of the main issues and Obama won handily. So how is defunding this or holding America hostage until it is rewritten or eliminated the will of the people?

 

[TheIronSheik]

I am hardly a Congressional Historian, and I am sure there have been awful examples of "leadership" in the past, however has there ever been a worse Speaker than Boehner? He seems to be doing harm to the nation, to Congress' reputation (as if it could get worse... but WAIT! THERE'S MORE!) and to his own party. He seems to have lost the faith of many in his own party and has demonstrated not only an inability to get anything done. Well, anything positive.

Historically, will be be viewed as one of the worst speakers ever?

So we're just going to act like Langdon Cheves didn't exist. Typical Democratic-Republican bias.

 

[Fennis]

I am hardly a Congressional Historian, and I am sure there have been awful examples of "leadership" in the past, however has there ever been a worse Speaker than Boehner? He seems to be doing harm to the nation, to Congress' reputation (as if it could get worse... but WAIT! THERE'S MORE!) and to his own party. He seems to have lost the faith of many in his own party and has demonstrated not only an inability to get anything done. Well, anything positive.

Historically, will be be viewed as one of the worst speakers ever?

No